The Use of Compensation Strategies in the Iranian EFL Learners

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org

ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)

Vol.7, No.9, 2016

165

The Use of Compensation Strategies in the Iranian EFL Learners’

Speaking and its Relationship with Their Foreign Language

Proficiency

Ali Akbar Taheri1 Mohammad Davoudi

2 *

1. M.A holder in TEFL, Department of English Language and Literature, Hakim Sabzevari University, Iran

2. Assistant Professor of TEFL, Department of English Language and Literature, Hakim Sabzevari University,

Iran

Abstract Compensation Strategies (CpSs) are strategies which a language user employs in order to achieve his intended

meaning when precise linguistic forms are for some reasons not available at that point of communication.

Different factors may influence the use of CpSs, among which the level of language proficiency is one of the

most important ones. The present study attempts to investigate the relationship between compensation strategies

use and the level of language proficiency and gender. In order to explore this relationship, four distinct groups of

learners – advanced male, advanced female, intermediate male, and intermediate female, each containing 12

members– participated in the study. The participants were interviewed individually and their performances were

tape-recorded and then transcribed. The findings of the study indicates that "self-repetition", "direct appeal for

help", and "approximation" are the most frequently used strategies; there is a significant relationship between the

frequency of compensation strategies use and proficiency i.e. the frequency of compensation strategies use

increases as the level of language proficiency develops whereas no significant relationship was observed

between strategy frequency and gender.

Keywords: Compensation Strategies, Approximation, Circumlocution, Fillers, Repetition, Language

Proficiency.

1. Introduction

Some people can communicate effectively in an L2 with only 100 words. How can they do it? They use their

hands, they imitate the sound or movement of things, they mix languages, they create new words, and they

describe or engage in circumlocution when they do not know the right word. In short, they use compensation

strategies. The concept of compensation strategies (CpSs) or communication strategies (CSs) - different terms

which refer to the same concept - came into existence as a result of the inadequacies of the old theories to offer a

clear conception of what it means to know a language. Chomsky’s (1965, cited in Karimnia & Salehizade, 2007)

view of the linguistic theories is primarily concerned with "an ideal speaker-listener in a completely

homogeneous speech community, who knows its language perfectly…" (p.3). Hymes (1967, 1972, cited in

Brown, 2000) on the other hand, questioned the relevance of Chomsky’s view to real life situations. Therefore,

he used the term ‘communicative competence’ to refer to that aspect of our competence that enables us to

convey and interpret messages and to negotiate meanings interpersonally within specific context.

Canale & Swain (1980) proposed four components which make up communicative competence. They are as

follow: 1) grammatical competence 2) discourse competence 3) sociolinguistic competence and 4) strategic

competence. Strategic competence refers to the individual’s ability to use compensation strategies, e.g.,

paraphrase, circumlocution, literal translation, lexical approximation, and mime to get their message across and

to compensate for a limited or imperfect knowledge of rules or the interference of factors such as fatigue,

distraction or inattention (Rababah, 2002). Both native and non-native speakers’ use CpSs, but non-native

speakers use them more frequently. Language learners often use CpSs to cope with problems they encounter

while attempting to speak a second or foreign language.

It is evident that no individual’s linguistic repertoire is perfect. Both non-native and native speakers of a given

language resort to compensation strategies when there is a mismatch between their available linguistic resources

and intended meaning. Most researchers agree that CpSs are used to bridge the gap that exists between the

speakers’ linguistic competence in the target language and their communicative needs. Strategies, in general, are

the moment by moment techniques that learners employ to solve problems posed by second language input and

output. The field of second language acquisition has recognized two types of strategy: learning strategies and

compensation strategies. The former relates to input – to processing, storage and retrieval-- while the later

pertains to output, how we productively express meaning, how we deliver messages to others (Brown, 2000).

The issue whether these are two distinct strategies or are complementary has not been resolved yet.



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

166

Research Questions

On the basis of the results of previous research and with the purpose of the clarification of the aforementioned

ambiguities, 3 research questions are investigated:

Q1. Which compensation strategies are used more frequently by intermediate and advanced Iranian EFL

learners?

Q2. Is there a significant relationship between the frequency of compensation strategies use and the learners’

foreign language proficiency?


gender?

2. Literature Review

2.1 Compensation Strategies

Researchers first raised the notion of compensation strategies (CpSs) at the beginning of the 1970s, following the

recognition that the mismatch between L2 speakers’ linguistic resources and communicative intentions leads to a

number of systematic language phenomena whose main function is to handle difficulties or breakdowns in

communication (Dornyei, 1997). Theses speakers spend a great deal of time and effort struggling to make up

their L2 deficiencies. Therefore, considerable amount of research during the last 3 decades has concentrated on

the CpSs notion, attempting to understand strategic language use and investigating the nature of CpSs,

taxonomies of strategic language devices, variation in CpSs use, and the practical implications of CpSs research.

2.2 Research on Compensation Strategies, Attitudes and Interests

Research on compensation strategies has been developed mainly in terms of the identification and classification

of these strategies; investigation into the specific individual CpSs and the influence of task type and proficiency

related factors on CpSs choice. The prominent researchers in this field of study have drawn a clear distinction

between learning and compensation strategies. Focusing on CpSs, they have attempted to identify various

compensation strategies using different elicitation techniques and propose strategy taxonomies. Different

taxonomies of CpSs mentioned in previous section were the results of such studies.

Rababah & Bulut (2007) investigated the compensatory strategies used in the oral discourse of second year

students studying Arabic as a second language (ASL) in the Arabic Language Institute at King Saud University

in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The study examined the various strategies used by a sample of 24 male learners who

were all high school graduates from 8 different countries and speaking 8 different languages. To elicit the

compensatory strategies used, the subjects were audio-recorded while performing two tasks: an interview and a

role-play. The data were transcribed and analyzed. The results showed that the subjects used a range of

compensatory strategies in their oral production, where "paraphrase" was used as the most frequent and

"coinage" and "asking for repetition" as the least frequent strategies. Moreover, there were differences between

the individual learners’ strategies according to their native language. The findings of the study showed that ASL

learners were risk-takers, and they expanded their limited linguistic resources to achieve their communicative

goals.

Margolis (2001) aimed to provide an empirical foundation of student strategies to compensate for missing

knowledge or deficiencies in speaking and listening ability while undertaking an oral exam interview. It was

attempted to indicate what compensation strategies Korean students most utilized, least utilized, and

relationships between strategies, test scores, gender, and age. Participants included 72 1st year Tourism

Information Management students in a Seoul area college required English Conversation course. Their levels

ranged from beginner to pre-intermediate. The results indicated that students most often utilize the strategy of

seeking help—asking for confirmation or more information. Making guesses was the second most often

observed strategy. A range of other strategies, such as using gestures and mime, synonyms and antonyms,

coining words, circumlocutions, etc., as a combined category were the least observed strategy utilized.

As it was mentioned before, investigation into the specific individual CpSs has attracted the attention of some

researchers. Liskin-Gasparro (1996) designed a study to analyze the use of CpSs, particularly circumlocution, by

speakers at the intermediate-high and advanced levels of oral proficiency in Spanish. The analysis of learners'

discourse showed that advanced speakers, more than intermediate- high speakers rely on a range of second-

language-based strategies that included, but was not limited to circumlocution.

One of the most favorite subjects in the realm of CpSs research was that of levels of language proficiency and

task type and their relationship with strategy use. In general, learner’s use of CpSs undergoes considerable

restructuring and reorganization as proficiency increases. Littlemore(2003) discovered that higher proficiency

learners tend to employ more ‘achievement’ strategies, such as paraphrase and word coinage, and that lower

proficiency learners tend to employ more ‘reduction’ strategies, such as word abandonment and word avoidance,

and that the former are more effective.

Young (1992) noted that there was indeed an inverse relationship between the number of compensatory

strategies used and the proficiency level of Dutch subjects learning English as a foreign language. She suggested



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

167

a fairly straightforward explanation of this fact, namely that low proficiency learners encounter more lexical

problems and therefore need to resort to compensatory strategies more often. However she also noted that on

some tasks high proficiency learners used more kinds of CpSs than low proficiency learners. High proficiency

learners tend to use more holistic conceptual strategies, typically involving semantic approximation by means of

words or gestures. On the other hand, low proficiency learners tended to use more transfer-based strategies.

As it was reported before, the effectiveness of learning strategies has been confirmed by different studies but

the case is not so straightforward about compensation strategies. Compensation strategies, by filling the gaps

during the course of communication, will result in more input which in its turn may lead to learning. Opposing

this view, Ellis (1986, cited in Griffiths, 2004) argued that it is possible that successful use of compensation

strategies may actually prevent language learning since skillful compensation for lack of linguistic knowledge

may obviate the need for learning. Gregersen et al (2001) stated the case as follow:

For example, one could speculate that compensation strategies, particularly those that help in

overcoming limitations in speaking and writing, could have the potential to hold a learner back in

the FL acquisition process. While it may be important in the early stages of acquisition to keep a

conversation going by switching to the mother tongue, avoiding communication, coining words, or

using circumlocution, a learner may become dependent upon these strategies, thus stunting later

progress in the target language. This may also be true for a few of the cognitive strategies (p. 106).

Much of CpSs research has been concerned with defining, identifying and classifying compensation

strategies. The rest has focused on the effect of different variables on CpSs use and teachability issues. Target

language proficiency is one of the most researched variables. The findings of available research suggest that less-

proficient learners use more CpSs (Poulisse & Schils 1989; Liskin-Gasparro 1996, Ting & Phan, 2008). They

rely more on L1 strategies and in general the pattern of CpSs use differs between less proficient and more

proficient learners. The results seem to be logical; less proficient learners are expected to use greater deal of

strategies due to less developed repertoire of linguistic knowledge.

As a teacher, the observations and experience gained out of teaching in different levels of language

proficiency do not conform to the results obtained in relevant research. The mismatch between the research

results and what actually happens in teaching environment was the first stimulus of the present study. On the

other hand, the focus of attention on some specific realm of research has led to the paucity of studies on some

neglected matters. Iranian EFL learners employ a great deal of strategies. The pattern of Iranian learners strategy

use has been investigated several times but it has focused on learning strategies in particular. Compensation

strategies, as it had been the current tradition in strategy research field all over the world, have been overlooked

by Iranian researchers and attentions have been focused on learning strategies. The most available explanation,

justifying this deficiency, is that of research procedures, i.e. data collection, elicitation, and examination is much

simpler when concerning with learning strategies. As a result the field of research on CpSs, at least in Iran and

about Iranian learners, lacks studies which may shed light on EFL problems and ambiguities.

3. Method 3.1 Participants

A total of 48 EFL learners took part in this study. Their age ranged from15 to 27 and their mother tongue is

Farsi. Of the 48 subjects, 24 were male and 24 were female. Each group of male and female participants was also

divided to 12 learners at the intermediate proficiency level in English and 12 at advanced level. Therefore, four

distinct groups of learners participated in the study: 1) advanced male (AM), 2) advanced female (AF), 3)

intermediate male (IM), and 4) intermediate female (IF), each consisting of 12 subjects. All the participants were

the EFL learners in English department of Iranian Academic Center for Education, Culture and Research

(ACECR). Their learning experience differed between 2 to 5 years.

3.2 Learning Context

Iranian Academic Center for Education, Culture and Research- Jahad Daneshgahi - was founded in 1981. Its

English Department (Mashhad Branch) started working in 1992. The main purpose of this department is to

nurture learners who are able to communicate effectively in English. This department consists of teenagers and

adults branches. In teenagers' group, LET'S GO books are used as the teaching material in 7 terms (each lasts 3

months - 44 hours -). INTERCHANGE and PASSAGES series pursue LET'S GO books during 13 terms in

adults' group. There are two ways to sign in English learning courses according to the applicant's age and level of

English proficiency: Learners either commence learning English language from the very first ( when they have

no knowledge about it ) or take an entrance exam. This placement test will measure their knowledge of English

language and according to the results, the applicants will be appointed in the appropriate stage (in teenagers'

group) or level (in adults' group). Applicants are permitted to enter teenagers' group after turning 11 and adults'

group after turning 15. Learners' progress in each level/stage is measured using this formula: 10 points of a

written midterm exam + 30 points of a written final exam + 60 points of students' learning activities – mostly

oral – during the term.



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

168

3.3 Instrumentation

To investigate the frequency of compensation strategies use and its probable relationship with level of language

proficiency and gender, two elicitation techniques were used: 1) oral interview – as the main elicitation task- and

2) retrospection

3.3.1 Oral interview

CpSs researchers have used different methods to elicit data needed to study compensation strategies. Some

researchers have used tasks which are purposefully designed to elicit CpSs. According to Rababah (2002), these

methods include picture description,picture reconstruction, video-taped conversation, narration, instruction, close

test, role play and interview. These different methods affect the speaker's selection of a certain strategy.

Despite the fact that all the tasks cited above are successful in eliciting strategic behaviors, many of them

seem remote from real-life communication. It is believed that the most naturalistic methods of data collection are

oral interviews and conversations (Wongsawang, 2001) which in the optimal way take place between the native

speakers of English and the participants of the study. The main drawback in this elicitation technique, however,

is that CpSs are rarely found because what the participants may say is less controlled by the experimenters

(Kasper & Kellerman, 1997).

3.3.2 Retrospection

This technique is a very useful addition to other research methods as it increases the number of unambiguously

identifiable CpSs, allows elimination of incorrectly identified CpSs, and helps validate many of the CpSs set up

(Dornnyei& Scott, 1995).In addition, in the identification of some CpSs, message reduction in particular, the

researcher has to rely almost entirely on retrospective data (ibid).Retrospection is not, however, an infallible

method since retrospective data is incomplete and sometimes inaccurate. On the other hand, retrospection is

invaluable in that the type of information we obtain through it cannot be obtained through other methods.

3.4 Procedure

The present study aimed at exploring the rate of compensation strategies use in EFL learners' speaking and its

probable relationship with language proficiency and gender. The two main phases in the process of study include

1) subject selection and 2) assessment.

3.4.1 Subject selection

As it was mentioned before, all the participants in this study were EFL learners in Iranian Academic Center for

Education, Culture and Research- Jahad Daneshgahi. In this center, after studying LET 'S GO books, learners

start learning INTERCHANGE (Richards, Hull, & Proctor, 1997) and PASSAGES (Richards et al., 2008) series.

Interchange (Third edition) consists of four volumes: Intro, Book 1, Book 2, and Book 3 which aim at

developing meaningful communication skills. Passages is a high-intermediate to advanced course which

provides a follow up for students who have completed beginning and intermediate courses. It is coordinated to

function as a sequel to Interchange series.

At the beginning of subject selection procedure, two selection criteria were specified: 1) the level of learners'

English proficiency – intermediate and advanced- on the basis of learning material they are studying and 2) their

success in developing speaking skill on the base of their grades in successive terms of learning English and the

teachers' overall understanding about them. Then, a large sample of learners – about 100 subjects- were

considered. Half of them were studying the third volume of Interchange- Interchange 3- corresponding to an

intermediate level of English proficiency and the rest consisted of those who have completed studying Passages

2, corresponding to an advanced level of language proficiency. Next, the list of each learner's grades in English

courses during the years of studying English in educational center was used. As it was mentioned before,

learners' progress in each level/stage is measured using this formula: 10 points of a written midterm exam + 30

points of a written final exam + 60 points of students' learning activities – mostly oral – during the term.

Since it was predicted that some invitations may be declined due to different reasons, a group of 65

participants who met the main criteria were selected from the first sample. Then, they were invited over the

phone to take part in the study. The learners were assured that they were not going to be tested and the interview

was going to be done for research purposes .However, as it was predicted before, some invitations were declined

and some participants, although agreeing to take part at first, did not attend the interview session who were

replaced from participants in the second sample.



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

169

3.4.2 Assessment

When the subject selection process was completed, the participants were asked to attend the interview session.

To each participant, a 20-minute session for interview was allocated. The chronological program of interviews

was so designed to prevent any contact between learners, since they might inform each other about the content of

interview and this may affect the other participants' performance. The interview was carried on in a 2×3 room

and it was seen no external noise interfered in the process of interview. At the beginning, the participant was

greeted in Farsi and it was allowed to tape-record the interview. The participant was asked not to be concerned

about the cassette-player and try to ignore it. A list of interview topics had been prepared in advance. The topics

were elicited from Interchange and Passages books to involve concepts which are either interesting or

challenging.

The topics paper was handed to the participant and the participant was asked to have a look at it and decide

about the subject of interview. The participant was allowed a maximum time of 3 minutes to think about his/her

favorite topic and even take notes. After starting speaking, the participant usually summarized his overall

opinion about the topic in two or three minutes and then it was the time for the interviewer to enter the process of

conversation and challenge the participant. During the course of interview, as it was tape-recorded, those

probable examples of compensation strategies use was recorded too- by the researcher- to be used later in

retrospection. The main purpose of taking note was to record those samples of CpSs which are not possible to

elicit by tape-recording, i.e. nonlinguistic and paralinguistic strategies such as mime, gesture, and eye contact. It

was tried to be done in a way not to distract the speaker or cause a sense of anxiety. The average time of

interview for advanced participants was about 10 minutes whereas the time was about 7 minutes for intermediate

participants. To carry out the second phase of elicitation, the guidelines of retrospection were followed as closely

as possible.

According to Poulisse, Bongarets and Kellerman (1987), the data should be collected immediately after the

performance without actually forewarning the participants and the subjects should be provided with contextual

information to activate their memories. For the latter purpose, the recording of the interview was played to the

participants and their comments were written. During the course of retrospection, some participants tried to skip

through some items. It seemed to have two reasons: first, they were reluctant to recall all their thought

proceedings, since they think this would reveal a lack of knowledge and they might be belittled. Second, our

learners were not trained how to retrospect their thoughts and recall them.

3.4.3 Data Analysis When the elicitation phases were completed, the recordings were transcribed. Then, the researchers went through

the transcripts, examining every instance when it was suspected that some sort of CpSs was found. Some

performance features may assist in detecting strategic behaviors. For example, noticeable deviation from the

native speaker's norm in the interlanguage syntax, word choice and discourse patterns, false starts, pauses,

drawls (lengthening the sounds as a time gaining devise), fillers (ah, am), repeats, slips of tongue (lapses and

speech errors) and self-repair may be evidence of a problem in learner's language proficiency (Faerch & Kasper,

1993, cited in Rababah and Bulut, 2007). These features were used to signal a CpS use.

Inventory of Strategic Language Devices (Dornyei & Scott, 1995) was used as the source of CpSs

classification. Their taxonomy – which was mentioned earlier- is considered as a summary of all the taxonomies

available in CpSs research where some new strategies are added too. This is the most comprehensive

classification of compensation strategies so far and consists of 33 main strategies, some including 2 to 5 subsets.

In the first review of transcripts, using performance features, the doubtful areas were detected. In the second one,

the inventory of strategic language devices was used to help in marking and labeling different compensation

strategies. The third review was also done to assure that all potential cases of CpSs are identified, since the large

number of compensation strategies made it difficult to detect them all at the first glance. The strategic utterances

were then counted and classified for the purpose of data analysis.

In the present study, two types of nominal variables are involved, each with two levels or categories: level of

language proficiency (intermediate and advanced) and gender (male and female). Since the focus of this study is

on the frequency of compensation strategies use, that family of analyses can and should be used to address any

research questions in which only nominal variables are included and frequencies are compared. Hence, Chi-

square (X²) is the most appropriate test for analyzing these data. In this procedure, the researcher compares the

frequencies observed in a sample with some theoretical or expected frequencies. The frequencies refer to

categories used to classify the data, such as male/female, natives/non-natives, monolinguals/bilinguals, or high

language learning achievers/low achievers.



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

170

4. Results and Discussion

In order to explore the patterns of CpSs use at different stages of the speakers’ target language development and

the effect of language proficiency and gender on CpSs use frequency, the performance of four groups were

examined. The results are presented below with respect to each of the research questions.

4.1 The First Question

Q1: Which compensation strategies are used more frequently by intermediate and advanced Iranian EFL

learners?

Frequency counts and percentages are calculated to display the compensation strategies used more frequently by

intermediate and advanced Iranian EFL learners. Among the 33 main kind of compensation strategies cited in

Dornyei and Scott's (1995) taxonomy, 24 were used by the participants of the study. A total of 395 instances of

compensation strategies were identified in the oral performance from the sample of 48 participants. Table 1

shows the frequency of these strategies. Most widely used strategies included "Self-repetition" (64 instances),

"Direct appeal for help" (47 instances), and "Approximation" (40 instances). And "Code-switching", "Retrieval",

and "Interpretive summary" were the least frequently used strategies. Advanced learners used "Self repetition"

(50 instances) as the most frequent and "Interpretive summary", "Retrieval", "Omission", "Use of similar

sounding words ", "Code switching", and "Word coinage" as the least frequent strategies. Intermediate learners

used "Direct appeal for help" (29 instances) as the most frequent and "verbal strategy marker", "over

explicitness" and "Word coinage" as the least frequent strategies.

Table 1. Frequency of Strategy Use for All Learners

TOTAL FREQUENCY

(IF)

FREQUENCY

(IM)

FREQUENCY

(AF)

FREQUENCY

(AM)

STRATEGY

22 2 2 4 14 Message abandonment

4 0 2 1 1 Message reduction

13 3 1 5 4 Message replacement

8 1 3 3 1 Circumlocution

40 8 8 14 10 Approximation

24 2 0 7 15 Use of all purpose words

2 1 0 1 0 Word coinage

30 1 4 10 15 Restructuring

14 4 3 3 4 Literal translation

1 0 0 1 0 Code switching

4 2 1 0 1 Use of similar sounding

words

4 1 2 1 0 Omission

1 0 0 1 0 Retrieval

29 3 6 7 13 Self-repair

29 2 2 12 13 Self-repharasing

3 0 1 1 1 Over explicitness

16 0 2 10 4 Mime

20 0 0 11 9 Use of fillers

64 5 9 26 24 Self-repetition

14 1 0 6 7 Verbal strategy markers

47 27 2 6 12 Direct appeal for help

3 2 1 0 0 Indirect appeal for help

1 0 0 0 1 Interpretive summary

2 0 0 2 0 Comprehension check

395 65 49 132 149 TOTAL

The most frequent used strategies identified in this study are discussed individually and illustrated with

examples taken from the data. Foreign/second language learners, adopting CpSs, replace the optimal meaning

(actual meaning) with the adjusted meaning (what is actually said when they encounter a difficulty). The optimal

meaning for each example of CpSs use is given, when needed, to note the difference.



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

171

Self-Repetition

Learners repeat a word or string of words immediately after they were said in order to gain time to produce a

lexical or structural target language item. The most widely used strategy in the present study was "self-

repetition", with a total of 64 cases. As it is evident from Table 1, advanced learners used "self-repetition" three

times more than intermediate learners. The following examples taken from the corpus show the use of self-

repetition strategy, which is italic-typed:

(1) …. "but I think it's so hard, it's so hard … to decide about this."

(2) …. "some of them … some of them are shocking … some … some of the cultures shock me."

(3) "When they were teenager, they try. ..they try to solve this problem."

Optimal meaning: "When they were teenager, they tried to solve this problem."

Direct appeal for help

This strategy occurs when the speaker turns to the interlocutor for assistance by asking an explicit question

concerning a gap in his L2 knowledge. This strategy was the second mostly used with 47 cases out of a total of

395 in which intermediate female learners used most of the cases (27). Most of the cases of direct appeal in the

present study were those of asking for a lexical item in learners' native language.Examples of this strategy are as

follow:

(1) … "when you don't have your friends … درد��س … , I have to speak and I …"

(2) "I think I choose physics or some majors like mechanics, that are very ..ر��دی ."

(3) … "I'm going to robotic class, because I … really love it, … I think I won't be… ر��… in future.

Approximation

The use of a single vocabulary item or structures which shares enough semantic features with the desired item

was counted as an approximation strategy. The oral production yielded 40 cases where the frequency in

intermediate learners was two-third that of advanced learners. The following utterances taken from the learners'

performance are examples of this strategy which are italicized:

(1) "When she goes back to the USA, he … she, … she write … a topic."

Optimal meaning: "When she went back to the USA, she wrote an article."

(2) "I just told them I want to go to teacher training center and they become very surprise."

Optimal meaning: " … and they became very shocked."

(3) …. And say why other, why don't you choose the other, other subject and I told that …"

Optimal meaning: "And said why didn't you choose another university major and I told that …"

4.2 The Second Question

Q.2. Is there a significant relationship between the frequency of compensation strategies use and the learners’

foreign language proficiency?

The participants of the study were divided in two distinct group of language proficiency: intermediate and

advanced, each containing 24 members. As it is displayed in Tables 2 and 3, advanced learners used 281 cases of

CpSs where intermediate learners used 114.



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

172

Table 2: Frequencies of Compensation Table 3: Frequencies of Compensation

Strategies Used by Advanced Learners Strategies Used by Intermediate Learners

Strategy Frequency Percent Strategy Frequency Percent

Self-repetition 50 17.8 Direct appeal for

help

29 25.4

Self-repharasing 25 8.9 Approximation 16 14.0

Restructuring 25 8.9 Self-repetition 14 12.3

Approximation 24 8.5 Self-repair 9 7.9

Use of all purpose words 22 7.8 Literal translation 7 6.1

Use of fillers 20 7.1 Restructuring 5 4.4

Self-repair 20 7.1 Self-repharasing 4 3.5

Direct appeal for help 18 6.4 Circumlocution 4 3.5

Message abandonment 18 6.4 Message replacement 4 3.5

Mime 14 5.0 Message

abandonment

4 3.5

Verbal strategy markers 13 4.6 Indirect appeal for

help

3 2.6

Message replacement 9 3.2 Omission 3 2.6

Literal translation 7 2.5 Use of similar

sounding words

3 2.6

Circumlocution 4 1.4 Mime 2 1.8

Comprehension check 2 .7 Use of all purpose

words

2 1.8

Over explicitness 2 .7 Message reduction 2 1.8

Message reduction 2 .7 Verbal strategy

markers

1 .9

Interpretive summary 1 .4 Over explicitness 1 .9

Retrieval 1 .4 Word coinage 1 .9

Omission 1 .4 Total 114 100.0

Use of similar sounding

words

1 .4

Code switching 1 .4

Word coinage 1 .4

Total 281 100.0



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

173

Figures 1 and 2 display these frequencies schematically.

Figure 1: Frequencies of Compensation Strategies Used by Advanced Learners

Figure 2: Frequencies of Compensation Strategies Used by Intermediate Learners

An analysis of chi-square was run to investigate the existence of any significant relationship between the

frequency of compensation strategies use and the learners’ foreign language proficiency. As displayed in Table

4, the chi-square observed value is 70.60. The observed value is greater than the critical value of chi-square at 1

degree of freedom, i.e. 3.84.



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

174

Table 4: Chi-square Compensation Strategies by Proficiency

PROFICIENCY

Chi-Square 70.605a

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .000

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The

minimum expected cell frequency is 197.5.

Based on these observed results, it can be concluded that there is a significant relationship between the frequency

of compensation strategies use and the learners’ foreign language proficiency. Thus, the first null-hypothesis as

no significant relationship between the frequency of compensation strategies use and the learners’ foreign

language proficiency is rejected.

Table 5 displays the frequencies of the compensation strategies as used by advanced and intermediate

students. The advanced students made more use of the compensation strategies.

Table 5: Frequencies Compensation Strategies by Proficiency

Observed

N

Expected N Residual

ADVANCED 281 197.5 83.5

INTERMEDIAT

E

114 197.5 -83.5

Total 395

4.3 The Third Question


gender?

As displayed in Tables 6 and 7, 24 male and 24 female participants of the study had similar performance

concerning the total number of strategies used.

Table 6: Frequencies of Compensation Table 7: Frequencies of Compensation

Strategies Used by Male Learners Strategies Used by Female Learners

Strategy Frequency Percent Strategy Frequency Percent

Self-repetition 33 16.7 Direct appeal for help 33 16.8

Self-repair 19 9.6 Self-repetition 31 15.7

Restructuring 19 9.6 Approximation 22 11.2

Approximation 18 9.1 Self-repharasing 14 7.1

Message

abandonment

16 8.1 Use of fillers 11 5.6

Self-repharasing 15 7.6 Restructuring 11 5.6

Use of all purpose

words

15 7.6 Mime 10 5.1

Direct appeal for

help

14 7.1 Self-repair 10 5.1

Use of fillers 9 4.5 Use of all purposewords 9 4.6

Verbal strategy

markers

7 3.5 Message replacement 8 4.1

Literal translation 7 3.5 Verbal strategy markers 7 3.6

Mime 6 3.0 Literal translation 7 3.6



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

175

Figures 3 and 4 display these frequencies schematically.

Figure 3: Frequencies of Compensation Strategies Used by Male Learners

Message

replacement

5 2.5 Message abandonment 6 3.0

Circumlocution 4 2.0 Circumlocution 4 2.0

Message

reduction

3 1.5 Comprehension check 2 1.0

Over explicitness 2 1.0 indirect appeal for help 2 1.0

Omission 2 1.0 Omission 2 1.0

Use of similar

sounding words

2 1.0 Use of similar sounding

words

2 1.0

Interpretive

summary

1 .5 Word coinage 2 1.0

Indirect appeal

for help

1 .5 Over explicitness 1 .5

Total 198 100.0 Retrieval 1 .5

Code switching 1 .5

Message reduction 1 .5

Total 197 100.0



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

176

Figure 4: Frequencies of Compensation Strategies Used by Female Learners

An analysis of chi-square was run to investigate the existence of any significant relationship between the

frequency of compensation strategies use and the learners’ gender. As displayed in Table 8, the chi-square

observed value is .003. This value of chi-square value is lower than the critical value of chi-square at 1 degree of

freedom, i.e. 3.84.

Table 8: Chi-square Compensation Strategies by Gender

PROFICIENCY

Chi-Square .003a

Df 1

Asymp. Sig. .960

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The

minimum expected cell frequency is 197.5.

Based on these results, it can be concluded that there is not any significant relationship between the frequency

of compensation strategies use and the learners’ gender. Thus, the second null-hypothesis indicating no

significant relationship between the frequency of compensation strategies use and the learners’ gender is

retained.

Table 9 displays the frequencies of the compensation strategies as used by male and female students. The

male and female students used almost equal number of the compensation strategies.

Table 9: Frequencies Compensation Strategies by Gender

Observed N Expected N Residual

MALE 198 197.5 .5

FEMALE 197 197.5 -.5

Total 395

5. Discussion & Conclusion

The present study attempted to explore the frequency of compensation strategies (CpSs) use by 48 learners from

two distinct levels of language proficiency (intermediate and advanced) and gender (male and female) to

determine any probable relationship between frequency use and proficiency/gender variables. The 48

participants of the study, distributed in four distinct groups – advanced male, advanced female, intermediate

male, and intermediate female, each including 12 subjects – were interviewed one by one and the oral

performance (tape-recorded during interview) was then transcribed. Afterwards, the instances of strategic



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

177

behaviors were detected on the basis of Dornyei's & Scott's (1997) taxonomy. Frequency counts and percentages

were calculated to display the compensation strategies used more frequently by intermediate and advanced

learners and the analysis of chi-square was run to investigate any significant relationship between the frequency

of CpSs use and the level of language proficiency and gender. According to the results, "self-repetition", "direct

appeal for help", and "approximation" are the most frequently used strategies. It was found that there is a

significant relationship between the frequency of compensation strategies use and the learners’ foreign language

proficiency, i.e. the frequency of compensation strategy use increases as the level of language proficiency

develops. On the other hand, no significant relationship was found between the frequency of compensation

strategies use and the learners’ gender.

A total of 395 instances of CpSs were identified in the learners' performance. In comparison with

similar studies (Rababah & Bulut, 2007; Dornyei& Scott, 1995), the number of CpSs found in the corpus is

much less. The reason underlying this paucity of cases can be detected in the data collection procedure. The most

naturalistic methods of data collection are believed to be oral interviews and conversations. The main drawback

in these elicitation techniques, however, is that CpSs are rarely found because what the participants might say is

less controlled by the experimenters. Rababah and Bulut (2007) used an oral interview and a role-play task while

Dornyei and Scott (1995) employed cartoon description, definition, and guided role-play. Despite the fact that

these data collection procedures –except oral interview – are successful in eliciting strategic behaviors, they

seem remote from the real-life communication. Off course, it is not easy to claim that oral interview and

conversation represent real-life communication. Even if the subjects feel relaxed, they will still have the feeling

of being tested. Thus, their performance may be affected. If researchers are interested to carry out their study in a

natural setting, it will be “… difficult to control and the results are often problematic to interpret. If a particular

phenomenon is the object of study, such as the use of strategies for referential communication, one may have to

wait days for any spontaneous emission of relevant data. Further, natural data are the product of a myriad of

factors over most of which the researcher is unaware (Bialystok, 1990, p. 161).

According to Khanji (1996) and Yarmohammadi & Seif (1992), paraphrase, repetition, restructuring, and

approximation are among the most widely and frequently used strategies. Therefore, the results of the first

question, i.e., the most frequently used strategies – except about "direct appeal for help" –are in line with the

findings of previous studies. The first and third most frequently used strategies – self-repetition and

approximation- were employed mostly by advanced learners. High proficiency learners tend to use more holistic

conceptual strategies, typically involving semantic approximation by means of words or gestures. The

explanation for this proficiency-related differences seems to be quite straightforward–“learners of a low

proficiency level do not have a sufficiently large L2 vocabulary at their disposal to come up with suitable

approximation”(Poulisse, 1990).

The second most frequently used strategy – direct appeal for help – was mostly used by female

intermediate learners. It seems that the frequent employment of "direct appeal for help" is a consequence of

teaching method which is employed in the educational center. The main focus in education is to nurture learners

who are able to communicate effectively in English. Therefore, a great deal of class time is devoted to speaking

skill. Since the first language of all teachers is the same as learners' and to help learners to keep communication

going, learners are used to asking the unknown lexical items in Farsi. On the other hand, the limited vocabulary

knowledge of intermediate learners may have a role in resorting to this strategy. Thus, the frequent employment

of "direct appeal for help" in the present study reflects the influence of teaching method on strategy use.

The second question explored the relation between strategy use frequency and level of language

proficiency. In general, learner’s use of CpSs undergoes considerable restructuring and reorganization as

proficiency increases. Poulisse (1990) noted that there was indeed an inverse relationship between the number of

compensation strategies used and the proficiency level of Dutch subjects learning English as a foreign language.

She suggested a fairly straightforward explanation of this fact, namely that low proficiency learners encounter

more lexical problems and therefore need to resort to compensation strategies more often.In her study on Persian

learners, Paribakht (1985) also found similar results.

In the present study, it was revealed that there is a significant relationship between the frequency of

compensation strategies use and proficiency i.e. the frequency of compensation strategies use increases as the

level of language proficiency develops. This finding is in contrast with that of previous studies. Intermediate

learners employed 114 instances of CpSs while the advanced learners used 281 instances. Two factors seem to

underlie this contrast: First, the learners have not been acquainted with CpSs use; CpSs training is not addressed

in teaching material. Even the teachers do not have a clear concept of the subject. Therefore, the learners do not

know these strategies. They themselves have discovered some compensation strategies during the years of

learning and employ them in communication. As they learn more and spend more time in learning environment,

the chance of strategy discovery increases. They also use their peers' experience and share their own. The second

factor that may underlie this contrast is that intermediate learners are less risk-taker than advanced learners.

During the course of retrospection, intermediate learners showed that they do not have a strong self-confidence



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

178

in speaking. This may originate from their limited repertoire of linguistic knowledge. Some participants told the

researchers that sometimes they had alternatives in mind to express the meaning but the fear of making mistake

prevented them from giving them a try.

The third question asked about the probable relationship between CpSs use and gender. No detailed

study concerning compensation strategies is in hand but the results of similar studies on learning strategies,

which according to some researchers – e.g. Oxford (1990) – include compensation strategies, show greater

willingness of female learners to employing CpSs. Ofcourse, there are studies (e.g., Tercanlioglu, 2004)which

indicate women use fewer strategies than men. In this study, no significant relationship was found between two

variables. Both male and female learners used CpSs at relatively the same level: male learners used 198

instances as compared to 197 instances of female learners.

5.1 Implications and Applications

The findings of this study indicate that Iranian learners have not been acquainted with compensation strategies.

Being afraid of making mistake in the public eye prevents them from risk-taking and they resort to those cases of

CpSs which they are relatively assured of their effect. These facts confirm the necessity of teaching CpSs. CpSs

should be taught so that communication does not break down. Although employing suitable CpSs will stop

communication from breaking down, this is just the first and most apparent function of CpSs.

On the other hand, some researchers (e.g., Dornyei, 1995; Dornyei and Thurrell, 1991) advocate the teaching

of communication strategies for enhancing second language acquisition, hopefully the ultimate goal of language

classrooms. Faucette (2001) states, “Communication strategies would serve as an excellent means for less

proficient learners to have the tools to maintain the conversation, resulting in the opportunity to receive more

language input and improve their language ability” (p. 6). Moreover, Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) believes

that a non-native speaker's ability to keep a conversation going is a very valuable skill because by maintaining

the conversation, the non-native speaker can presumably benefit from receiving additional modified input.

Indeed, if language learners soon give up without employing the language and interactive strategies at their

disposal, it is unlikely they will develop their communicative ability.

Teaching compensation strategies necessitates their integration into EFL curriculum. Language teachers and

syllabus designers should develop an effective strategy-training program that equips EFL students with CpSs

that enhance language acquisition. Fauccete (2001), criticizing the poor quality of text books in presenting CpSs,

maintains that it is perhaps disappointing that textbooks appear to offer few effective practice activities to

develop communication strategy competence. The teachers’ resource books have a bit more to draw on, yet are

by no means ideal. More high quality materials designed to teach compensation strategies would be very

welcomed. Paribakht (1985) suggests that such results – the relationship between language proficiency and CpSs

use frequency – can be used as criteria for material design, sequencing and presentation in EFL/ESL classroom.

She even proposes a strategic approach which is complementary to a communicative approach to L2 teaching.

References Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching

and testing. Applied linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.

Bialystok, E. (1990). Communication strategies: A psychological analysis of second-language use. Blackwell.

Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching.(4th

Ed.). New York: Longman.

Dornyei, Z. (1995). On the teachability of communication strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 55-85.

Dornyei, Z. (1997). Psychological processes in cooperative language learning: Group dynamics and motivation.

Modern Language Journal, 81, 482-493.

Dornyei, Z, & Scott, M. L. (1995). Communication strategies: An empirical analysis with retrospection. In J.S.

Turley & K. Lusby (Eds.).The proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Symposiom of the Deseret

Language and Linguistics Society. Provo, UT: Brinhum Young University. 155-168.

Dornyei, Z, & Scott, M. L. (1997). Communication strategies in a second language: Definitions and taxonomies.

Language Learning, 47(1), 173-210.

Dornyei, Z, & Thurrell, S. (1991). Strategic competence and how to teach it. ELT journal, 45(1), 16-23.

Faucette, P. (2001). A pedagogical perspective on communication strategies: Benefits of training and an analysis

of English language teaching materials. Second Language Studies, 19(2), 1-40.

Gregersen, T., Martinez, R. V., Rojas, P. P., & Alvarado, L. E. (2001).Can foreign language learning strategies

turn into crutches?: A pilot study on the use of strategies by successful and unsuccessful language

learners. Revista Signos, 34 (49-50), 101-111.

Griffiths, C. (2004). Language learning strategies: Theory and research. Occasional Paper No. 1.School of

Foundation Studies, Auckland Institute of Studies, St Helens, Auckland, New Zealand.

Karimnia, A., & Salehizade, S. (2007). Communication strategies: English language department in Iran.

Iranian Journal of Language Studies, 1(4), 278-300.

Kasper, G., & Kellerman, E. (Eds.). (1997). Advances in communication strategy research. London: Longman.



Vol.7, No.9, 2016

179

Khanji, R. (1996). Two perspectives in analyzing communication strategies. IRAL: International Review of

Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 34(2), 144.

Larsen-Freeman, D, & Long, M. H. (1991).An introduction to second language acquisition research. London &

New York: Longman.

Liskin-Gasparro, J. E. (1996). Circumlocution, communication strategies, and the ACTFL proficiency

guidelines: An analysis of student discourse. Foreign Language Annals. 2(3), 317-330.

Littlemore, J. (2003). The communicative effectiveness of different types of communication strategy. System,

31(3), 331-347.

Margolis, D. P. (2001).Compensation strategies by Korean students. The PAC Journal. 1, 163-174.

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Newbury House.

Paribakht, T. (1985).Strategic competence and language proficiency. Applied linguistics, 6(2), 132-146.

Poulisse, N. (1990). Variation in learners’ use of communication strategies. Learning styles, 77-87.

Poulisse, N. & Schill, S. E. (1989). The influence of task- and proficiency-related factors on the use of

compensatory strategies: A quantitative analysis. Language Learning, 39(1), 15-48.

Poulisse, N., Bongaerts, T., & Kellerman, E. (1987).The use of retrospective verbal reports in the analysis of

compensatory strategies.

Rababah, G. (2002). Second language communication strategies: Definitions, taxonomies, data elicitation

methodology and teachability issues. ERIC [Online] Available:

http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1a/bc/3a.pdf

Rababah, A. G & Bulut, D. (2007).Compensatory strategies in Arabic as a second language. Poznan Studies in

Contemporary Linguistics, 43(2), 83-106.

Richards, J. C., Hull, J., & Proctor, S. (1997). New Interchange: Students' Book. Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C., Lesley, T., Sandy, C., Hansen, C., & Zukowski, J. (2008). Placement and evaluation package

interchange third edition/passages second edition with audio CDs (2): An upper-level multi-skills

course. Cambridge University Press.

Tercanlioglu, L. (2004). Exploring gender effect on adult foreign language learning strategies. Issues In

Educational Research, 14(2), 181-193.

Ting, S. & Phan, G. (2008). Adjusting communication strategies to language proficiency. Prospect, 23, 28-36.

Wongsawang, P. (2001). Culture-specific notions in L2 communication strategies. Second Language Studies,

19(2), 111–135.

Yarmohammadi, L., & Seif, S. (1992). More on communicative strategies: Classification, resources, frequency

and underlying processes. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching,

30(3), 223.

Young, R. (1992). Expert-novice differences in oral foreign language proficiency. ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. 347 840.

Ali Akbar Taheri was born in Neyshabur, a small city in the northeast of Iran in 1981. He got my bachelor's

degree in English literature in the state university of Hakim Sabzevari located in Sabzevar in 2008. He got his

MA in TEFL in 2015 in the same university. He is interested in doing research on vocabulary learning strategies

and English learning strategies.

Mohammad Davoudi is an assistant professor in TEFL. He has been teaching English as a foreign language for

the last 22 years in different universities. His areas of interest are mainly in Psycholinguistics, Reading

Comprehension and Vocabulary development. He has published a number of articles and books on reading

comprehension and vocabulary learning. He is working in the Department of English Language and Literature of

Hakim Sabzevari University in Sabzevar, Iran.

Documents

The Use of Compensation Strategies in the Iranian EFL Learners